This is why you can't have social health insurance in the US … -approval/ … -approval/

As long as medicine can be priced in this way it can’t be included in tax funded insurances except by taxing the population into a coma.

And who prices it this way? And how can they get away with it?

The better question is how much does the treatment cost, not what can it be priced as.

The even better question is how little could the treatment cost, given investment in Research and Development to refine the manufacturing process to reduce the cost as much as possible.

This is what the private sector is good at: incentivising the funding of creative people, by people with money, to improve things so that these capitalist funders can gain a return on their investment by charging a price as high above the actual costs as possible without disincentivising demand to a suboptimal level. The higher the profit, the more incentive for different capitalists to fund different creative people to try and drive down these costs as much as possible, to get in on these higher profits, at the cost of more competition incentivising the lowering of their respective pricing closer and closer to the actual costs, until the incentive to get in on this new market is diminished and the market stabilises. Or at least, that’s what the theory says: incentivise people with money to pay creative people to incentivise them to improve production/services until they cost as little as possible.

But is this version the best way of incentivising people to improve production/services until they cost as little as possible? That’s also a good question.

Given the outcome of production/services costing as little as possible, however that is reached, social healthcare doesn’t have to involve taxing the population into a coma because the prices would have been reduced to be affordable.

Only if prices like $2.1 million matched actual costs as much as possible, even after refining the costs of making and providing such things as much as possible, can you legitimately make this argument. Is this the case for this new drug? Not even close to being close, I bet.

Dear lord this is sad.

This is why it is evil to tax privates. Because when that sort of robbery (demanding money and if not given the money punishing a person) is normalized, you get this. Robbing citizens to pay for the comforts of quite wealthy non-citizens.

Excellent news.
Well done California for trying to catch up with Europe.

The only reason why rightists will care, even though it’s a lesser reason:
Investing in equality of opportunity by ensuring the most basic of human needs means less costs further down the line.

Simple example: strain the pockets of those who are already at a disadvantage (who only did the same human thing that you would do if born in their disenfranchised situation and move to where there is more opportunity by however means necessary) and more desperate measures are resorted to. Notably turning to crime, which costs the healthcare system indirectly through its consequences anyway. Perhaps they resort to amateur home-made healthcare which makes things worse in the long term, making criminal desperation worse and maybe taking up more medical resources that could be being spent on other people once enough dirty money has been collected to pay for proper treatment, and all the while denied of their health to either use their skills in the workforce and contribute to the economy either straight away or later down the line.

It’s a simple economic decision.

And yet the tribalism and valuation of money, territory and idealistic justice over the necessary pre-cursor for all these things: human life - this is enough to override basic empathy and rational economics in the minds of those so self-righteous about their own entitlement that they’ll actively deny money to real, ill or dying people with real lives, the only one they’ll ever get, with real family and real friends just the same as anyone else on the planet.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: it never ceases to amaze me how disgusted some people get at the thought that the wrong kinds of humans might benefit from their actions. Your life would be shit without society and the infrastructure and cooperation that allowed private opportunities to reach so amazingly far as they do in the first place - pay your debt to it, i.e. your taxes, and appreciate what you have, dare even to be grateful and happy for it. Or are you so weak that even a small degree of sharing defeats you?

Thanks for supporting the criminals, Sil.

Way to “us versus them” and “if you’re not with us you’re against us” the situation, Wendy.

If a criminal is a criminal is a criminal in your mind, if there is no reason to commit crime, no context or rehabilitation to be encouraged then your static black and white image of the world might have some bearing on reality.

And the benefits go towards the innocent and the productive as well, are you going to “tar them all with the same brush” to top it off? Why are you so angry and vengeful towards a worse-case-scenario that hasn’t even happened yet? There will be cheaters in any system, but you’d prefer to err so much on the side of caution that not even the vast majority of worthwhile benefits can be risked? The rest of the civilised world does it to great effect, what is it about the dark ages “that you support” so much?

They’re illegals, they are not innocent, duh!

I support our citizens, USA citizens, not criminals from Guatemala, Mexico, Nigeria, Somalia, Iran or anyone else who comes here illegally and expects to do whatever in the fuck they want at our countries expense. I have no problems being intelligent and sharing with those who are my immediate neighbors, USA citizens or people who go through the appropriate channels to become citizens. We don’t need open borders, we don’t need floods of people who are slow or who never assimilate to live in this country and make it a shithole just like all the countries they come from. They need to solve the problems of their own countries rather than bring their problems to our shores and expect us to bend over backwards when they bring nothing to the table but crime and an unwillingness to uphold our culture, and our laws. They already have countries and we are not invading their countries and making them the USA.

Maybe we should, maybe we invade them all and take over and make all English TV programs and all signs in English and nobody speaks their native tongue anymore on their own soil, they speak English. They no longer have a sovereign soil. Give the world asylum and lets Westernize every aspect of their cultures until their histories are completely erased. No Greece or Greeks, only USA. No Columbia or Columbians, only USA. We can rename the Earth, The United States of The World. Tear down their buildings, their monuments and their museums of history, erase those countries and their people from existence, just like its being done in the Southern USA, erasing confederate history. Westernize everything and make it all the same, all PC. No more foreign foods, only hamburgers and fries, real USA foods. It all melts into our pot and becomes like us, everyone the same. No countries, no races, no different languages, everyone can be a brunette, with brown eyes, and the height of 5’7, and gender fluidity rules. One year you’re a man and the next year you’re a woman. Then the next year, you can be non-binary, whatever your 'lil heart desires. Come one, come all, bring your fullblown AIDS to us so we can clean up your transexual bad choices of having unsafe sex no matter what. It’s our pleasure to fix up your fucked up ideology and lives because we are the greatest country on Earth and that is our responsibility to take in everyone and pay for everyone who wants us to.

Piss off with those stupid, modern ideas! The more modern our country becomes, the more godless, the more immoral, the more narcissistic, and the more we talk about feelings that cannot co-exist with reality, them lofty ideals based solely on individual subjectivity rather than cut and dried objectivity. Oh, men are women are men are woman. Abortions conducted outside of the womb are a-okay like they want in NY. White males are the devil, they are guilty until proven innocent like the #Me Too movement says. Women have to let men change clothes in places where women are most vulnerable because the men claim to be women. Yeah, all that crazy BS and there’s tons of it, tons of fucked up modernity. Speech that disagrees and offends is hate speech! People are losing their incomes cuz their being deplatformed and policed by modern retards who think everything conservative is hate speech and hate speech is actual violence and equal to terrorism. Modern retards want to green and socialize everything so we actually revert to the dark ages, rather than moderate everything to preserve our traditions, our Constitution, our country.

Fuck illegal immigration and fuck modernity! Get in line illegals like everyone else who deserves to be here more than you because they did it the right, legal way!

Yikes, feel better now? That was a little off-the-wall good old fashioned venting right there…

Soooo. Modern authoritarian “leftists” aside (who I am against too), and back to the topic and what I said that made you want to respond, the whole anti-immigrant schtick isn’t black/white right/wrong as its made out to be, like most things there’s at least a small degree of sense in it, but like most populist scapegoats it’s primarily based on nonsense. The nonsense absolutely stems from a lack of empathy, a fear of change and an ignorance of history - apparently there’s a strong market for that especially in the southern states. Even if you do know the obvious basic history, you’re choosing to ignore it when you mentally segregate yourself from immigrants so clearly - somehow your recent ancestors adjusted to american ways, they even made “american” what it is now, yet somehow that’s not possible anymore? It hasn’t even been that long since modern standards of immigration policing have even been possible, and for all that time up until then, “illegal” or not, people were travelling in and out of the states, across borders that may as well have been open.

And what if you were born on the “wrong” side of the line in the sand? Your “proper channel” for being american is having been born - congratulations. And everyone else? If you were anyone else, and you wanted opportunity, you would be bringing nothing other than a work ethic - the vast majority of people are looking for purpose, they want to be useful, accepted and proud of their social standing 0% different from you and any american who had to put up with being brought up in shitty circumstances. The fact that you don’t know/understand/accept this basic human fact, and they’re all inherently evil in your eyes, just goes to show how little you’ve travelled/bothered to find out first hand. Stop letting opportunists fill your head with dumbed down tales, just so they can sell their narrative based on an emotional response that will keep you hooked - you’re being used to make other people money from making the world worse. All these news stories about how much worse it is a few miles away play on your psychological biases because humans are susceptible to overblowing fears “just in case”, rather than appreciating facts.

All that’s really happening is people who want to help other people (doctors and nurses) are getting to help people in the time they have that they want to give to that cause. They get paid for their time just as much as if they are treating their own family, whoever they’re treating. The better health we ALL have, the less problems cross the borders, the less crime and health problems escalate into the future, and the current investment pays off to the benefit of americans as well as immigrants.

Anti-immigrant nationalists like to stupidly think immigrants don’t have a life and a connection where they came from and where their family and friends are. Most of the time they just want to work where there actually is work and then go back home, and all the legality over their status just gets in the way of their productivity. It’s not easy to abandon all that any more for them than it would be for you to simply up sticks and move to a foreign country with a different first language - remember first and foremost that people from other countries are humans much like you, with real lives, real emotions, and real difficulties just like you. Like I said, there will be cheats like there already are anyway, it won’t all be sunshine and rainbows, but the huge majority of it all brings everyone up with all but zero negative impact on everyone’s day to day lives. You’ll be primed to look out for the first sign of trouble just so you can say “I told you so”, and all the good will probably go completely under your radar because who cares about good news? That amygdala of yours is hungry! Feed your frontal cortex instead.

Well, many of us are here because we are descended from people who did not ‘do it the right way’. Not that past sins mean new ones should be overlooked.

Prove your claim KT.

Sil wrote

No, people like you are screwing up my country and the world.

Was it done “the right way” when Europeans sailed over the Atlantic, landed in the US and started living there just because they showed up, and slowly took over the entire continent by means of horrific magnitudes of death and bloodshed, and claimed it as their own?

Because unless you are descended entirely from the indigenous peoples who used to solely populate the whole continent, you are at least in part descended from people who did not ‘do it the right way’.

Proof? A history book.

When have nomads who settle nowhere ever had a claim to a land? The indigenous people in North America were nomads. People who never develop land have no claim to it.

Nomads who move from place to place… kinda like the Europeans who moved from Europe to America and wandered from the eastern colonies all across the continental US to settle as they pleased?

They seemed to have no problems claiming the land as they killed their way through it, and you seem to have no problems with that claim.

How about your modern day capitalist who moves all over the place with no permenant residence, perhaps from one of their houses to another one, perhaps across countries and continents - they’re wandering and having no problems with claiming land, and you seem to have no problems with their claim. Settling nowhere is your requirement, remember - money changing hands didn’t seem to stop the European immigrants who built America in the first place, so why does it make the difference now?

How many people own land today and don’t develop it? Tons, most by a long way probably. Do they have a claim to their land? Apparently so, and you seem to have no problems with their claim.

How much do you have to develop it to qualify as developing it? These “nomads” built shelters and farmed the land - apparently that qualifies as colonisation. If/when they move on is the land then free for anyone? I guess that means as soon as you move out of a house it’s free game for anyone to simply “claim” without compensation like the European colonisers who founded American.

And why is that a requirement at all?

Why are you just pulling reasons out your ass that don’t hold up to even a moment’s thought - which are routinely and legally violated even today. Your arguments are plainly hypocritical, just admit it.

Why the need to be ridiculous? Established societies set up laws that govern the land as well as protect the societies borders and their citizen’s claims to ownership of the land, so no need to go to ridiculousville with all that emotion based junk you wrote about history. Some societies made homes on lands to cultivate and grow their societies while others roamed about never advanced enough to understand the ramifications of leaving vast territories open for claiming by new residents.

Everyone beyond the first man and women were immigrants who unjustly claimed ownership of lands surrounding the first couple who had claims to the world in their minds but could not develop or protect the globe. That’s how ridiculous you sound with your pseudo history lesson as if it holds water and the silly rationalizations you place on today’s lands even though you know full well how they are governed. Please refrain from any further nonsense.

Joker told me that there is a historical concept that is called the right of conquest which has happened everywhere constantly all throughout time up until the last few centuries, which you are guilty of and seem to have no problem with hypocritically either, so there. :angry-boxing: :sunglasses: Go back to the exact area of Africa you germinated from and be happy and conscience free. :laughing:

Actually this proves my point just as well - as I was aware that it would.

“Everyone beyond the first man and women were immigrants” - your own words undo your anti-immigrant sentiments :slight_smile:

So well done for coming up with my initial argument against yours, all by yourself and proving yourself wrong, you clever lady!

I do have a problem with “the right of conquest”, which was my whole point against the creation of America in the first place… where did I say I didn’t? :-k

How is my being perfectly consistent hypocritical? My whole point is that nobody should have to go back to where they “germinated from”, they should “be happy and conscience free” to immigrate as people always have - by your own argument above.

Given “the right of conquest” if these immigrants conquered your lands, would they have this right of conquest to displace you? If your answer is they wouldn’t win, then your argument is either a challenge to them or equivalent to nothing more than “might is right”.

The only emotion based argument I’ve made is in favour of empathy with immigrants (such as yourself, as you pointed out above) to realise they’re just regular humans like you. Everything else that I’ve said makes perfect sense without any need for emotion.

So as long as you stick around to claim your territory, you have the claim, right? Didn’t work so well for the Cherokee’s lands - they weren’t nomads.

I guess that point I made about the normadic life of the modern day capitalist or owner of multiple properties means squatters have more right to claim whichever properties they aren’t using. Or the laws protect them now? I guess any of the American nomadic tribes, before their displacement by the European, should have thought to make those laws! Those dumbasses, they deserved to have their lands claimed by right of conquest, huh?

K: such ignorance and bigotry in one piece… congrats… usually most people hide
their ignorance and bigotry into a couple of posts… well done, it only took you one post
to reveal your white privilege and your complete hatred of people… well, not
people who you approve off like whites, anglo-saxon, church going, conservatives…
because you are that, you approve of that… and anyone different…
you have fear, hatred, anger, disgust toward anyone different then you…


Your ashamed of who you are that is why 98% of your posts reek of vitriol towards anyone who doesn’t think like you. How many times are you going to attack me Peter? Is that all you know how to do other than whine about things an eight year old know better about in your blog thread?

Pish posh, I’m not anti-immigrant as you so wrongly suppose, I am anti-illegal immigrant for starters. Much of what I wrote was an absurd example of your reasoning. I think you crave to be ridiculous and your most recent thread speaks of your communist beliefs as well…all ridiculousness. Rent your clothes from the state as well. LOL.

You say no one has rights to land if they purchase it, but if they verbally claim they have rights cuz they roam the continent, they own the land. Now that’s ridiculous and in no way does it prove your point. I’m gonna claim I own you cuz I claim I own the entire world since I reside on it’s entirety subjectively. < That’s your far fetched logic.

The Cherokee fought for their lands and lost and don’t get it twisted, the Cherokees wanted all the lands, they just couldn’t protect those vast borders. The indigenous people warred over territory and shed plenty of each other’s blood over land, so stop acting as if they were innocent and knew nothing of conquest. You don’t understand or appreciate history and wish to rewrite it, that’s the problem.

Conquest is might is right, and might comes from a civilized, organized, weaponized, more advanced society. Whoever is more advanced can conquer if they so choose. They want to conquer to upgrade those still in the dark ages who are not making use of resources for their hopefully expanding population. Duh, that’s why there are arms races never ending.

Sil wrote

Obviously, you are fine with the conquest for you stay where you do not belong. I know you want to say that you belong anywhere you desire to roam, but that is not reality. And the reason I say you want to rewrite history is in your mind only Europeans sinned in the past, is for this shame that you think everyone else is entitled to move about unrestricted and settle down wherever with nothing (no money, no skills, no holdings) but a supposed work ethic. Heck, why don’t you pay for everyone’s travels, the legal fees to enter everyplace, education, and their social welfare costs since you are not saving for any major purchases such as properties?

Actually, I agree with Gloominary about property rights being revoked when lands are undeveloped and have no residents after so many years (I can’t remember the number of years he suggested), say after 3 years the property is resold.

No that’s ridiculous. Just property is all. Nice slippery slope fallacy.

It sure isn’t :slight_smile:

I’m not even saying what my position is, I’m just showing your position is hypocritical. That’ll be your black and white thinking again: “if I argue against one thing I am in favour of its absolute opposite”.

I guess their own desires and bloodshed excuse their lands being forcably taken from them out of desire and through bloodshed?

I’m not re-writing anything, I’m stating the fact that America was founded on immigrants taking lands from those who were living there.

Yep, that sure is the case. Does that make it okay?

Again, I am not fine with the conquest of anywhere.
Of course not only Europeans sinned in the past, no murderous conquests were fine.
Who said I’m not saving? You’re putting a lot of words in my mouth just to call them ridiculous.

So indigenous Americans “snoozed and losed”. Sounds legit.

So back to your points that I was criticising: there is no argument against illegal immigrants that you can make that does not contradict how the whole thing you’re trying to conserve was set up in the first place. Hypocrisy.